Doomsday Clock Moves One Minute Closer to Armageddon
- Thread starter Greg Tito
- Start date
Oh, sh*t, the world's ending? When? December 21st? F*ck. When does Mass Effect 3 come out? March 6th?
We're good.
We're good.
Humanity has been predicting the end of the world for at least 10000 years, and, accordingly, for the past 10000 years, the world has been in a constant state of coming to an end in the next 5-10 decades. Yet, here we still are. One day, someone will be correct, but it won't be because they actually know anything; it'll be because, coincidently, it's finally time.
We do know there will be a true final end, some 5 billion years from now when the Sun finally exhausts all its fuel. By that time, humanity will either have left(if its smart) or long since been extinct.
My own take on the end of the world, barring any significant disaster like a global-killer impact or the Sun ending its lifespan, is that it will only be the end of society and civilization as we have come to know it. Humans and life on this planet will still exist, but the way we structure our society and live our lives will be completely different from what we have today. Optimistically, I think that at such a time, humanity will shift to a social, political, and economic structure that is less focused around power and status and more focused around progression and enlightenment(yes, I'm being very optimistic). Naturally, those whose existence thrives on a power-status-type structure will face extreme difficulty during such a shift. Those unable to adapt will die off. This is my interpretation of the statement "the meek shall inherit the earth", that it is not a Divine decree but a simple statement of natural consequence.
We do know there will be a true final end, some 5 billion years from now when the Sun finally exhausts all its fuel. By that time, humanity will either have left(if its smart) or long since been extinct.
My own take on the end of the world, barring any significant disaster like a global-killer impact or the Sun ending its lifespan, is that it will only be the end of society and civilization as we have come to know it. Humans and life on this planet will still exist, but the way we structure our society and live our lives will be completely different from what we have today. Optimistically, I think that at such a time, humanity will shift to a social, political, and economic structure that is less focused around power and status and more focused around progression and enlightenment(yes, I'm being very optimistic). Naturally, those whose existence thrives on a power-status-type structure will face extreme difficulty during such a shift. Those unable to adapt will die off. This is my interpretation of the statement "the meek shall inherit the earth", that it is not a Divine decree but a simple statement of natural consequence.
I know this is all a bunch of bullcrap, but part of me is still worried. Granted, that part is extremely paranoid, but still...
Okay, this is probably going to get me a warning, if not an outright ban, but Greg, you are HORRIBLY inaccurate with what the Mayan calender's predicting.
The Mayan calender is not predicting the end of the world: it's calculating the end of the sun's current phase. December 21st, 2012 is when the solar calender is supposed to reset (thus, entering into a new phase). The only people who say the Mayan calender is predicting the end of the world are these fear-mongering religious zealots who want to use people's fear to line their pockets with gold and, thusly, are using the 2012 "Doomsday" panic to goad gullible idiots into giving all of their hard-earned money away to them.
/rant
The Mayan calender is not predicting the end of the world: it's calculating the end of the sun's current phase. December 21st, 2012 is when the solar calender is supposed to reset (thus, entering into a new phase). The only people who say the Mayan calender is predicting the end of the world are these fear-mongering religious zealots who want to use people's fear to line their pockets with gold and, thusly, are using the 2012 "Doomsday" panic to goad gullible idiots into giving all of their hard-earned money away to them.
/rant
From what I remember back in 2010, we're all supposed to be dead right now because the Mayans said so.
Actually we were all supposed to die back in 2000 because a bunch of crazy people said so.
But hey, these are "scientists" right? So I guess that makes them more credible and stuff.....yea
Actually we were all supposed to die back in 2000 because a bunch of crazy people said so.
But hey, these are "scientists" right? So I guess that makes them more credible and stuff.....yea
Barack Obama was elected in 2008. Not 2010.Greg Tito said:
Or did these Armageddon Clock people forget to check their calendars?
Because they're scientists, not people with power like the president. They already know how to stop nuclear war and global warming. Reduce nuclear arsenals and reduce dependence on fossil fuels.justblues said:
They don't have the authority on those things. That's why they have stuff like this to raise awarness.
To quote FLuffee from the popular YouTube channel FLuffeeTalks [www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvx9lP_Oprg]...
FLuffee said:
I love how those are his only three posts.Steve the Pocket said:
OT: Why is this important? Does the position of the Doomsday Clock make global warming any more or less of an issue? Does it do anything to increase awareness of the problem? No! It's a silly and completely pointless symbol.
Problem with that is, how do you hit a target roughly the size of a car, flying at over 5 miles a second, with any kind of reliability? And even if you do hit it, you would have to hit it with enough force to completely destroy the very well armored warhead.Guardian of Nekops said:What we really need to do is set up a global system capable of shooting down nuclear weapons, from anywhere, heading to anywhere.
I mean, haven't we all sort of decided that these things were a bad idea, and that the only reason we want to have them is to be able to scare the other guys into not using theirs?
So yeah, just shoot the damn things down whenever they take off. Hell, have it automatically shoot down every rocket or thing that looks like a rocket and isn't on the flight plan approved by the UN.
We aren't going to convince people to destroy their nuclear arsenals due to fear of everyone else, but we CAN make them useless. And we should. Let the damn things rot in their silos, or reduce them to something that has to be delivered by hand.
That way, at least maybe we'd have to discover a new form of energy to blow ourselves up with. Should buy us a minute or two, anyway.
The only real way to defend against ballistic missiles is to shoot them down while they're still being boosted to orbit velocity, and that is only leaves you a very small window of opportunity, and you'd have to hit it while it's still over the launching nation, leaving any kind of ground-based weapon almost useless, and space platforms are outlawed by multiple treaties.
Plus you still have to deal with air-launched and submarine-launched weapons.
But even if you could create a missile shield that is 100% reliable, would that really help? Arguably the only reason the Cold War didn't turn into World War 3 was the nuclear deterrent. Its possible the world is actually a safer place now that global superpowers can no longer wage total war on one another.
there's always time for calibrations!Proverbial Jon said:Clearly the Doomsday Clock's "time" is realtive to whoever decides to set it, much like Garrus' clock is relative to him and him only. I mean, it can't be calibration time ALL the time. Can it?Radoh said:But, that clock is extraordinarily accurate.Proverbial Jon said:Just a guess but I'd say that clock is about as acurate as this one:
What time is it?
Calibration time.
Evidently there's a higher, philosophical context going on here. A social commentary on the state of our world. I just can't seem to find it...
Its just too alarmist, and unless its something we can actually track such as the time when nukes are being launched, then I could care less. Whats going to happen if it happens 5 minutes before, what if the clock ITSELF is not accurate with time at all, what if it doesn't even get rotated for a day? What then. Its just a straight up dial clock. Its just too simple.
@SilentHunter7
I admit the technical issues and the workarounds. Doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue it, and frankly? Screw the international treaties, for reasons I shall explain.
After the nuclear apocolypse, though, we'd be lucky to have 2.5% of our population LEFT. Also keep in mind that Mutually Assured Destruction only works so long as only sane persons, with control over countries and ambitions of their own which require the world to keep on spinning, have control over nuclear weapons. One madman, the same sort of person who ends up shooting up a mall and turning the gun on himself, could potentially trigger this whole thing if he got hold of a nuclear weapon. And they're not all accounted for.
We have the crazy people, we have the loose nuclear material, and our defense against being attacked is retaliation. Our idea of defending ourselves is to take the rest of the world with us, even if the guy who fires the first shot doesn't even have a country. In my mind, that's just insane.
So yeah. You feel safer with nukes if you want to, good sir, but I prefer ANY sort of conflict to "rocks fall, everybody dies." Including, by the way, the curbstomp sort of conflict where the aggressor nation destroys me and my country. At least that way, somebody survives it, and even in the aggressor nation some of those people (or at least their descendants) are good people.
I admit the technical issues and the workarounds. Doesn't mean we shouldn't pursue it, and frankly? Screw the international treaties, for reasons I shall explain.
World War 2 killed about 60 million people, 2.5% of the world population at that time. I believe that counts the genocides committed by the Nazis, which are not rightly a cost of the war... that's a horrible thing that Hitler was doing anyway, and which he would have continued to do even if the whole planet surrendered and bowed down to him without a fight. Therefore, the actual cost of the escalation of conflict (that which nuclear deterence could reasonably be expected to prevent, as opposed to that which nuclear deterence could reasonably be expected to ENABLE) was lower than that.SilentHunter7 said:
After the nuclear apocolypse, though, we'd be lucky to have 2.5% of our population LEFT. Also keep in mind that Mutually Assured Destruction only works so long as only sane persons, with control over countries and ambitions of their own which require the world to keep on spinning, have control over nuclear weapons. One madman, the same sort of person who ends up shooting up a mall and turning the gun on himself, could potentially trigger this whole thing if he got hold of a nuclear weapon. And they're not all accounted for.
We have the crazy people, we have the loose nuclear material, and our defense against being attacked is retaliation. Our idea of defending ourselves is to take the rest of the world with us, even if the guy who fires the first shot doesn't even have a country. In my mind, that's just insane.
So yeah. You feel safer with nukes if you want to, good sir, but I prefer ANY sort of conflict to "rocks fall, everybody dies." Including, by the way, the curbstomp sort of conflict where the aggressor nation destroys me and my country. At least that way, somebody survives it, and even in the aggressor nation some of those people (or at least their descendants) are good people.
We do need another world war. To reset the world again. After WW2 ended, it was like another Renaissance. People rejoiced, everyone worked together to try to fix the world and whatnot. And now look at us. The world is a shithole and it's overpopulated. I am serious, another world war would be good. Because there is no way that we can make any significant changes without something huge and terrible happening. Kinda like the ending of Watchmen. What kind of fucked up world needs a doomsday clock?
The clock is a symbol but the reality is still here. We are faced with pollution and increasingly lower resources.
We build these new lavish hotels and parks and fun stuff but not that much is being done towards survival and the future. We are short sighted. I feel like alot of the current world leaders and people with power just need to die off old age so the younger generations can take the reigns and start trying to fix shit.
I liked that movie where the earth`s core stopped and it had to be reset. Then the whole world gathered resources and people to build that machine. It costed alot but when the whoole planet is at risk noone cares for money they just did it.
Thing is until a cataclysm happens we wont move our sorry asses :X
We build these new lavish hotels and parks and fun stuff but not that much is being done towards survival and the future. We are short sighted. I feel like alot of the current world leaders and people with power just need to die off old age so the younger generations can take the reigns and start trying to fix shit.
I liked that movie where the earth`s core stopped and it had to be reset. Then the whole world gathered resources and people to build that machine. It costed alot but when the whoole planet is at risk noone cares for money they just did it.
Thing is until a cataclysm happens we wont move our sorry asses :X
Nice idea but it is pretty useless against the so called suitcase bombs. Someone could still smuggle the crap in somehow somewhere and detonate it. Not as devastating as an aerial detonation to be sure but still bad. Even more useless against cruise missiles which hug the ground and can be armed with at least tactical nukes and have ranges of hundreds of miles. This is a pipe dream for reasons that were made clear in my youth when the Star Wars program collapsed.Guardian of Nekops said:What we really need to do is set up a global system capable of shooting down nuclear weapons, from anywhere, heading to anywhere.
I mean, haven't we all sort of decided that these things were a bad idea, and that the only reason we want to have them is to be able to scare the other guys into not using theirs?
So yeah, just shoot the damn things down whenever they take off. Hell, have it automatically shoot down every rocket or thing that looks like a rocket and isn't on the flight plan approved by the UN.
We aren't going to convince people to destroy their nuclear arsenals due to fear of everyone else, but we CAN make them useless. And we should. Let the damn things rot in their silos, or reduce them to something that has to be delivered by hand.
That way, at least maybe we'd have to discover a new form of energy to blow ourselves up with. Should buy us a minute or two, anyway.
Also technologically unfeasible without further weaponizing of space which most folks agree is bad in itself.
OT
I really don't get why people would care about this. It is just a bunch of bollocks spouted by some eggheads with opinions. Proof of that is that they allowed Obama's election to influence the opinion before he even had a chance to do the nothing he did. Much like giving him a Nobel Peace prize for...what again? Oh yeah nothing but a sense of "hope." I'm not saying anyone else would have done different or better but actions should speak way louder than flowery words. Or opinions, or cheap theatrical "clocks."